It's not simply a contrary view robcasey, it's false claims, persistence in the face of demonstrably false information and trying to change the subject rather than admit error. There are good and bad sources and they are not measured by how we like them so yes, it's easy to be dismissive of stupid sites with an agenda (almost always financial) particularly when we are so familiar with them even if you are not. And you do need peer-reviewed papers to support your arguments and you do need a dissertation to become an expert in a particular field. Analogy fail for you.
For which I have no problem with and the vaccine industry is the only one with a compensation scheme in place. I think it's important to keep confidence in such an important public health measure and considering vaccines are given to healthy people (not a therapeutic prophylactic) the safety threshhold needs to be exceedingly high and injury compensated.
Not true, health insurance (depending upon one's coverage of course) will pay for illness regardless of the aetiology.
I'm probably going to do that anyway.
A serious vaccine adverse event is rare so I don't understand your implication that all vaccine adverse events lead to serious lifelong sequelae.
False. There are disabilities acts in place, at least in the U.S. that require education for special needs children. The quality may vary of course and children are only "expelled" if they are a danger to themselves or others that cannot be safely and humanly managed by staff.
Yes, therapies are shown to be effective for autists. I take it that you too are coming from a platform that vaccines cause autism. A difficult road for you which is not going to be accepted if you simply argue from assertion.
False. You can sue vaccine manufacturers if you have gone through NVICP first and can show that they knowingly made a defective or unsafe product. I don't know why anyone would want to go for suing a vaccine manufacturer when the standard of evidence is so low in the NVICP and the petitoner has all legal fees paid for win or lose.
Of course, just as with any medical intervention or driving them or letting them play, etc.
False. You have a tough time substantiating that one when there are countless studies and statistics which demonstrate the reduction in disease incidence and even elimination and eradication of vaccine preventable diseases.
What are the carcinogens in vaccines and remember, amounts are very relevant.
The HPV vaccines may very well prevent cancers caused by HPV strains and the Hepatitis B vaccine can certainly prevent liver cancer from hep b infections. There is no proof that vaccines don't cause excessive ear hair either and since that will go over your head, there is a thing called biological plausibility and the onus is upon you to provide evidence for why and how vaccines would cause cancer.
Of course they aren't necessary as long as one doesn't mind dealing with the disease and complications.
False. I don't know why this should be so hard for you when it took three seconds for
this. Vaccines, like anything else are not 100% safe. Can you think of anything that is? Do you apply this standard to everything you do?
Haven't looked at the numbers but this sounds steep. Even so, why aren't companies allowed to make a profit for their products?
Sure it happens and fortunately, we have oversight that reduces the public health impact to virtually nil. Stringent requirements put in place due to some disasterous occurances with adventitious agents decades ago when vaccine manufacturing was comparatively crude.
False.
Actually you're JAQ'ing off, making ridiculous claims and then expecting some kind of red-carpet treatment. All caps about vaccine conspiracies deserves mockery and ridicule.
Este
THEY JUST SHOOT ME DOWN IN A NICE WAY INSTEAD LOL!